Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: ICBO Approvals - was why can't we get along

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Jurisdictions in Washington state have also been known to request ICBO reports be submitted, or that the report #s for all proprietary products be included somewhere on the drawings.  I would guess that any area that used the UBC should have some familiarity with them.  Having seen noticable differences between ICBO values (always more conservative) and manufacturer’s literature values, I do like to see that they have done ICBO testing to ensure that they are using some established protocol to arrive at the results. 

 

Paul Crocker, P.E.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: GSKWY(--nospam--at)aol.com [mailto:GSKWY(--nospam--at)aol.com]
Sent:
Thursday, June 26, 2003 7:42 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Re: ICBO Approvals - was why can't we get along

 

My question was somewhat hypothetical - I actually do believe in independent third party testing, and for that matter I do not think certifying post-tensioning anchorages is a bad idea.

However,  I think users of such reports have a duty to actually read them, or at least the beginning part where it describes the system, to ensure that the system proposed is the same as the system certified.   I am not sure this is always the case.  

I have never heard of anywhere except
California requiring ICBO ES reports, but I guess that will change with the spread of the IBC.  

Gail Kelley